SEOUL, South Korea -- The U.S. and South Korea will launch joint military exercises this weekend to sharpen their readiness against North Korean aggression, the allies' defense chiefs, despite warnings from Pyongyang that the drills would deepen tensions on the peninsula. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Washington and Seoul want to send a "clear message" to North Korea after the March sinking of a South Korean warship. Forty-six South Korean sailors were killed in the sinking, which an international investigation pinned on a torpedo fired from a North Korean submarine near the Koreas' tense sea border. The waters have been the site of several bloody skirmishes in recent years.
South Korean honor guard soldiers wearing traditional military uniforms, salute during a rehearsal for the welcoming ceremony of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates in Seoul, South Korea, Tuesday, July 20, 2010. Gates, who arrived on Monday, will be joined by Clinton on Wednesday for high-profile security talks with their South Korean colleagues, a meeting meant to underscore Washington's firm alliance with Seoul as the two nations plan military exercises in a message of deterrence to North Korea. "These defensive, combined exercises are designed to send a clear message to North Korea that its aggressive behavior must stop, and that we are committed to together enhancing our combined defensive capabilities," Gates and South Korea's Kim Tae-young said in a joint statement issued Tuesday after their talks. North Korea flatly denies the accusations, and has warned that any punishment would trigger war. Gates arrived in South Korea late Monday for a series of high-profile security talks with South Korean officials. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton landed in Seoul on Wednesday morning for a conference with Gates and their South Korean counterparts later in the day. The U.S. and South Korea say North Korea must pay for the sinking of the Cheonan, the worst military attack on South Korea since the 1950-53 Korean War. The two Koreas remain in a state of war because the conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. South Korea's foreign minister, Yu Myung-hwan, told the YTN television network in an interview Tuesday that Washington is considering additional sanctions against North Korea. He said he expected a U.S. announcement on the issue on Wednesday. Clinton on Tuesday described South Korea as a "stalwart ally" but did not mention possible new sanctions. "It's particularly timely to show our strong support for South Korea, a stalwart ally, and send a very clear message to North Korea," Clinton told reporters in Kabul where she was attending an international conference on Afghanistan before departing for Seoul. "Tomorrow is a real show of solidarity."Gates said he and Clinton are to visit the Demilitarized Zone dividing the two Koreas on Wednesday to demonstrate their "steadfast commitment" to South Korea, where Washington stations 28,500 troops as deterrence against the North. The 155-mile-long (250-kilometer-long) DMZ serves as a buffer between the two Koreas and is strewn with land mines and guarded by hundreds of thousands of combat-ready troops.
At the height of the Cold War, the two Koreas occasionally exchanged gunfire along the DMZ. In 1976, two U.S. Army officers were hacked to death there with their own axes by North Korean soldiers. Former President Bill Clinton, who toured the no-man's land in 1993, reportedly described it as "the scariest place on Earth."South Korea and the U.S. plan to conduct a four-day combined maritime and air readiness exercise, dubbed "Invincible Spirit," off the Korean peninsula's east coast from July 25-28, their militaries said in a separate joint statement. About 8,000 South Korean and U.S. troops, more than 20 alliance warships and submarines including the massive aircraft carrier USS George Washington and 200 military planes are to take part in next week's drills, it said. The F-22 Raptor - the world's most advanced fighter jets - will also be flying training missions in and around Korea for the first time, it added. More joint drills would follow off Korea's east and west coasts in the coming months, the statement said. South Korea and the U.S. have said the drills are defensive-oriented, but the North has warned the training would only intensify tension because it is nothing but a preparation for an invasion. "The warmongers would be well advised to behave themselves, bearing deep in mind the consequences to be entailed by the above-said war moves," the North's government-run Minju Joson newspaper said in a commentary carried Tuesday by the official Korean Central News Agency. China has also opposed South Korea-U.S. military exercise, particularly one in the Yellow Sea, saying that would inflame tension on the peninsula.
NK threatens a sacred war that will be nuclear in response to joint military exercises
David Eimer, East Asian Corrospondent for the Telegraph, 07/24/10 “North Korea ready for 'sacred war' against South” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/7908078/North-Korea-ready-for-sacred-war-against-South.html The latest threat from the DPRK came the day before a large joint US-South Korean naval exercise is scheduled to start off the Korean peninsula. It follows Washington’s announcement last Wednesday that it would impose new sanctions on the renegade regime. Pyongyang raised the prospect of using its small nuclear arsenal in any future confrontation in a statement from the National Defence Commission issued by North Korea’s official news agency KCNA. “The army and people of the DPRK will start a retaliatory sacred war of their own style based on nuclear deterrent any time necessary in order to counter the US imperialists and the South Korean puppet forces deliberately pushing the situation to the brink of war,” said the statement. On Friday, North Korea had promised a ‘physical response’ to the naval war games. But by threatening to use nuclear weapons, Pyongyang has further elevated tensions in the region that have been running high since the sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan in March. Seoul claims a DPRK submarine was responsible for the loss of the corvette and the 46 crew on board. Sunday’s naval manoeuvres, which will see the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington join 20 other ships in the Sea of Japan, were planned as an effort to deter further aggression from North Korea. Pyongyang, though, has repeatedly denied sinking the Cheonan and claimed Saturday that the exercises were “nothing more than outright provocations aimed to stifle the DPRK through force of arms.” China, too, has criticised the drills and is unhappy with such a show of US military strength so close to its borders. Washington dismissed Pyongyang’s threat to use nuclear weapons as mere rhetoric. “What we need from North Korea are fewer provocative words and more constructive action,” said US State Department spokesman PJ Crowley.
Thus the plan: The United States Federal Government should stop the joint military exercises operated by the United States and South Korean Military in the Korean peninsula China Advantage (1/5)
Contention 2 is US – China Relations
Relations with China are rapidly declining – freeze of all military Sino-US talks and naval standoffs prove Iskander Rehman, Visiting International Fellow at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, 7/7/10, Eurasia Review, "Deflecting The Assassin's Mace: Pentagon's New AirSea Battle Concept", http://www.eurasiareview.com/201007074555/deflecting-the-assassins-mace-pentagons-new-airsea-battle-concept-and-its-strategic-relevance-to-india.html Over the past year, a whispering chill has settled over the waters of the Asia-Pacific, and as Sino-US relations continue their downward plunge, all talk of an emergent G2 axis based on mutual understanding and cooperation seems increasingly blithe. Already marred by a series of naval stand-offs in 2009, ranging from the harassing of the USNS Impeccable in the South China Sea to a mysterious collision between a Chinese submarine and the USS John McCain’s towed sonar array off the coast of the Philippines, Sino-US took a further blow earlier this year when Beijing unilaterally decided to freeze all militaryto- military contacts in response to the official confirmation of a long-announced 6.4 billion dollar arms transfer to Taiwan. The 9th Asian Security Summit, or Shangri-La Dialogue, held in Singapore last month, was the scene of tense verbal exchanges between US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates and General Zhu Chenghu of the Beijing National Defence University. This came only days after the Defence Secretary’s proposed fence-mending visit to the Chinese capital had been abruptly turned down.1 The Chinese government’s snub, cryptically imputed to the “visit’s inconvenient timing,” was a knee-jerk reaction not only to the Taiwan deal but also to the release of a new and potentially game-changing document named “AirSea Battle: A Point-of-Departure Operation Concept.” This 123 page report, which was released by the increasingly influential Washington DC-based Centre for Budgetary and Strategic Assessments (CBSA) in May, could not be more different in tone from the Obama Administration’s National Security Strategy, which preceded it by only a week or so. Indeed, while the latter expounds at length, and in rather woolly terms, the virtues of engagement, the AirSea Battle (ASB) concept, which has been subsequently validated by both the US Air Force and the Navy, is a terse, concise call for greater jointness between the two services in the WPTO, or “Western Pacific Theatre of Operations”, and is probably the most detailed blueprint for an armed Sino-US confrontation to have been released in the public domain for years. While its authors take pains to stress that the report is in no way a manifesto in favour of containment of China, or of a roll-back of the PLA’s military power, they do state quite clearly that the goal of ASB is to “offset the PLA’s unprovoked and unwarranted military buildup.” 2 This occurs at a time when China’s growing anti-access and area-denial capabilities (A2/AD) have fostered fears that US power projection in the region may become not only increasingly difficult due to its stagnating naval force structure, but also particularly risk-prone, thus leading to a slow but inexorable decline of American influence in the Asia-Pacific Theatre. This has led to widespread concern, not only amongst the cognoscenti of the US policy-making world, but also in Asia, where fears of an impending security vacuum have sparked a naval arms race. What follows is an attempt to shed some light on Asia’s rapidly morphing security arena, first by briefly outlining the emerging fault lines and potholes currently shaking the regional military balance; and secondly by summarizing some of the main ideas underlying the ASB concept. It will then be argued that, notwithstanding the fact that the Indian Ocean’s tactical environment differs greatly from that of the Western Pacific, India can nonetheless glean some valuable insights from AirSea Battle, most notably when it comes to countervailing Pakistan’s vigorous efforts to implement a strategy of offensive sea denial.
China Advantage (2/5) China is opposed to US-ROK Joint Military Exercises for 5 reasons – Security, Strategic Thinking, Geopolitical Strategy, Security in the Korean Peninsula, and Sino-US relations – stopping it would be a bargaining chip in US-China relations People's Daily Online, ”Why China opposes US-South Korean military exercises in the Yellow Sea” 07/16/10, http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90780/91342/7069743.html
Major General Luo Yuan, deputy secretary general with the PLA Academy of Military Sciences, explained the reasons why China is opposed to the U.S.-South Korean military exercises in the Yellow Sea in a recent online discussion with netizens on People's Daily Online. Luo pointed out five reasons behind China's opposition to the joint military exercises:First, in terms of security, Chairman Mao Zedong once said, "We will never allow others to keep snoring beside our beds." If the United States were in China's shoes, would it allow China to stage military exercises near its western and eastern coasts Just like an old Chinese saying goes, "Do not do unto others what you do not want others to do unto you," if the United States does not wish to be treated in a specific way, it should not forcefully sell the way to others. Second, in terms of strategic thinking, China should take into account the worst possibility and strive to seek the best results. The bottom line of strategic thinking is to nip the evil in the bud. The ultimate level of strategic thinking is to subdue the enemy without fighting. Preventing crisis is the best way to resolve and overcome the crisis. China's current tough stance is part of preventive diplomacy. Third, in terms of geopolitical strategy, the Yellow Sea is the gateway to China's capital region and a vital passage to the heartland of Beijing and Tianjin. In history, foreign invaders repeatedly took the Yellow Sea as an entrance to enter the heartland of Beijing and Tianjin. The drill area selected by the United States and South Korea is only 500 kilometers away from Beijing. China will be aware of the security pressure from military exercises conducted by any country in an area that is so close to China's heartland. The aircraft carrier U.S.S. George Washington dispatched to the Yellow Sea has a combat radius of 600 kilometers and its aircraft has a combat radius as long as 1,000 kilometers. Therefore, the military exercise in the area has posed a direct security threat to China's heartland and the Bohai Rim Economic Circle. Fourth, in a bid to safeguard security on the Korean Peninsula, the U. N. Security Council has just issued a presidential statement, requiring all parties to remain calm and restrained to the so-called "Cheonan" naval ship incident, which had caused a major crisis on the Korean Peninsula. On the other hand, the joint military exercise by the United States and South Korea on the Yellow Sea has created a new crisis. This is another reason why China strongly opposes the military exercise on the Yellow Sea. In order to safeguard security on the Korea Peninsula, no country should create a new crisis instead they should control and deal with the existing one. Fifth, in terms of maintaining China-U.S. relations, especially the two parties' military relations, China must declare its solemn stance. China has been working to promote the healthy development of China-U.S. military relations. Therefore, China has clearly declared that it is willing to promote the development of the two parties' relations. Deputy Director of the General Staff Gen. Ma Xiaotian has also expressed his welcome to U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates to visit China at a proper time. Ma had made it clear at the meeting in Singapore that three key problems greatly impeded China-U.S. exchanges. First, the Unites States' arms sales to Taiwan. Second, the frequently detected American military aircraft and ships over and on the East and South China seas at close range. Third, the 2000 U.S. National Defense Authorization Act and the Delay Amendment restricted military exchanges with China in 12 fields. The current barriers have not been eliminated, while the United States has created another obstacle. This time, they not only sent military ships, nuclear submarines and Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers, but also aircraft carriers. Luo added that a U.S. aircraft carrier had once been in the Yellow Sea in 1994, also known as the "Kitty Hawk issue," which caused strong reactions from China at that time. After that, aircraft carriers have never appeared in the Yellow Sea area. The United States and South Korea said that the joint military exercise aims at putting pressure on North Korea and deterring North Korea's submarines. However, as the Yellow Sea is a marine outlet, the joint military exercises actually include the task of military surveillance. Any aircraft carrier has strong reconnaissance and early warning capacities therefore it can also monitor and detect on the circumjacent hydrologic geology, meaning that it can detect Chinese marine outlets over and over again. As the Yellow Sea is a high sea, the aircraft carrier can also detect the hydro-geological conditions of China's submarines' channels out to sea. Therefore, the two purposes of the joint military exercise, strategic reconnaissance and testing initial combat plans, will pose a threat to China. The United States has always talked about the China military as a threat, but this joint military exercise by the United States and South Korea proved that it is not China but the U.S. military that is the threat.
China Advantage (3/5)
Moving the exercises from the west to the east coast of Korea is not enough to solve – not substantial
Rachel O’Brian, staff writer for AFP, 7/22/10, “Strained US-Sino ties loom at Asia security forum”, http://www.google.com/ hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hjo1aP6h4naTjW5cl_-_eS2hXBWg) US and South Korean plans to hold a series of naval drills from Sunday in response to North Korea's alleged torpedoing of a South Korean warship in March are the latest source of bad blood between Beijing and Washington. The drills off the Korean peninsula -- relocated from the Yellow Sea due to Chinese objections -- are designed as a warning to nuclear-armed North Korea over the sinking of the warship with the loss of 46 lives, Gates said. Pyongyang denies involvement and Beijing has refused to blame its communist ally. "We resolutely oppose foreign military ships and planes coming to the Yellow Sea and other waters near China to engage in activities that affect China's security interests," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said. During a visit to South Korea this week, Gates acknowledged he was "disappointed" at China's rebuff of his scheduled visit in June but said he was willing to move forward. "I remain open to rebuilding and strengthening military-to-military dialogue between the United States and China because I think it can play an important role in preventing miscalculations and misunderstandings," he said. Even so, top US commanders have made it clear they are watching China's military buildup, particularly its naval reach into disputed territories in the resource-rich South China Sea. Speaking to US troops in South Korea on Wednesday, top US officer Admiral Mike Mullen said China's military had made "a fairly significant investment in high-end equipment" including satellites, aircraft, anti-ship missiles and a planned aircraft carrier group. He called the move a "strategic shift, where they are moving from a focus on their ground forces to focus on their navy, and their maritime forces and their air force". US officials worry that China's more assertive stance in the Pacific Ocean and its anti-ship missile arsenal, capable of striking aircraft carriers, could undercut America's long-dominant naval power in the region. Shi Yinhong, an expert on Sino-US military ties at Renmin University in Beijing, said the relocation of the US-South Korea naval drills from the Yellow Sea would not be enough to re-build trust. "That alone will not help Sino-US relations and the resumption of military ties," he said. "The opportunity to fully resume military exchanges has been lost due to the military exercises." Analysts said ASEAN member states would be looking on in horror as their immediate concerns -- such as territorial claims to islands in the South China Sea -- are drowned out by the noise of Sino-US tensions. Beijing lays claim to the entire sea but ASEAN members Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam have claims to the Spratly archipelago, along with Taiwan. Vietnam also claims the more northerly Paracels. The United States meanwhile demands unfettered access to vital sea lanes in the area. "The current chill in Sino-US military relations is quite unwelcome at the ASEAN Regional Forum," Center for Strategic and International Studies analyst Ernie Bower said.
China Advantage (4/5) Stopping the military exercises would prevent escalation of tensions with China Wen Wei Po, Hong Kong newspaper, 7/7/10 (re-reported in BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific, "Hong Kong paper accuses US of 'provoking' China with scheduled military drill", lexis)
In response to the joint military exercise that the United States and the ROK militaries would carry out in the Yellow Sea as they announced, Qin Gang, spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said yesterday that under the current situation, all sides should keep their composure and exercise restraint, and should not do anything that may aggravate the regional tension and do harm to the national security interests in this region. In the past days running, senior Chinese military leaders openly expressed strong opposition to the entry of the US aircraft carrier into the Yellow Sea, and emphasized that China has strong will and capability to deal strikes at any invading foreign warships. The United States' action of carrying out a military exercise in an area critically sensitive to China's security under the pretext of the Ch'o'nan [Cheonan] incident will be an extremely serious military provocation to China, not only reflecting the United States' hegemonic arrogance, but also showing that the United States has extended its strategy of containing China to the military domain in an undisguised manner. China resolutely responded by unsheathing the sword and made clear its clear-cut attitude. This was a necessary move for safeguarding regional peace. The United States should understand that Sino-US cooperation will benefit both sides, but Sino-US struggle will do harm to both sides, immediately stop its activities of military provocations, and prevent the escalation of the tense situation. In the past, the US military mainly carried out exercises in the Sea of Japan. This time, while the situation on the Korean Peninsula became tense drastically because of the Ch'o'nan incident, the United States indicated in a high-profile manner that it would carry out a joint military exercise with the ROK in the Yellow Sea, and announced that it would dispatch an aircraft carrier to take part in the drill. This was actually a targeted action of provoking China, as described in a Chinese proverb - "Xiang Zhuang's sword dance was aimed at killing Pei Gong who was then watching aside". The Yellow Sea is the gateway to the North China region where Beijing, China's national capital, is located. If American aircraft carriers can freely move into this sensitive area, that will put China's Liaodong Peninsula and Shandong Peninsula completely within the attack range of the US military force. This move taken by the US military will obviously smack of military deterrence. On one hand, the show of force in the Yellow Sea may give a warning to the DPRK; on the other hand, this is also to flex muscle towards China and conduct strategic reconnaissance against China's coastal military facilities. No matter what is the purpose, the United States' military presence at the door of China will do nothing good to the easing of the situation on the Korean Peninsula, but will just escalate the confrontation atmosphere in that region. China resolutely responded by unsheathing the sword and first carried out live fire shooting training in the East Sea, showing that China would not be indifferent to the United States' threats, and had capability and determination to protect her national security and the regional stability.
Decreased US-Sino ties lead to regional instability, prolif, and nuclear war
Eschan Adhariri, Armed Forces college national security professor, August 1, 1999 (Jane’s Intelligence Review, online)
Looking ahead, a continued deterioration of Sino-US ties does not bode well for the regional stability of the very large and equally important Asia Pacific. Yet this regional stability might be negatively affected for a long time if Washington and Beijing fail to bounce back from this fiasco and assiduously work to improve their strategic relations. In the meantime, the issue of immediate concern for the USA is nuclear non-proliferation. Immediate work has to be done by both sides to minimize damages on this issue. The PRC, armed with the knowledge of America's premier nuclear programs, is likely to be a much more sought after sources for nuclear proliferation than it has ever been in the past by those countries keenly interested in enhancing the sophistication of their extant nuclear programs and by those who have not yet developed indigenous nuclear know-how but desire to purchase it. China, along with Russia, has an established record proliferating nuclear technology. This reality is not likely to change in the foreseeable future, much to the continued consternation of now-nuclear India. The increased nuclear sophistication on the troubled subcontinent carries with it the risk of a potential nuclear holocaust. The Kashmir issue still remains unresolved and very explosive given the continued intransigence of both India and Pakistan to amicably resolve it.
China Advantage (5/5)
War with China goes nuclear
Charles R. Smith Professor of Politics and History, Marymount University Formerly military historian and research analyst for Data Memory Systems, Inc., a historical evaluation and research organization Tuesday, Aug. 14, 2001 “War With China” http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/8/14/174213.shtml
Fiction? Then consider this fact: The United States has no defense against a missile attack. The U.S. has NO missile defense and is only testing a limited system that might stop one or two missiles. Those who minimize the Chinese strategic forces frequently state that China has only 20 missiles. These people are fools playing games with the lives of millions of innocent humans. They fail to mention that each Chinese strategic missile is tipped with a multi-megaton H-bomb that can vaporize a city. In the previous scenario, Chinese forces used only half their current strategic and tactical missiles in a single attack, turning 10 of the top U.S. cities and most of free Asia into charred, radioactive wastelands. China apologists also question whether Beijing is willing to wage war against America. However, the Chinese military makes it very clear it wants nuclear combat with the U.S.A. According to an August 1999 policy document published by the People's Liberation Army Office of the Central Military Command, "unlike Iraq and Yugoslavia, China is not only a big country, but also possesses a nuclear arsenal that has long since been incorporated into state warfare system and play a real role in our national defense." "In comparison with the U.S. nuclear arsenal, our disadvantage is mainly numeric, which in real wars the qualitative gap will be reflected only as different requirement of strategic theory," states the PLA military document. "In terms of deterrence, there is not any difference in practical value. So far we have built up the capability for the second and third nuclear strikes and are fairly confident in fighting a nuclear war. The PCC [communist Party Central Committee] has decided to pass though formal channels this message to the top leaders in the U.S." China also has recently tested a new long-range missile capable of reaching America, the DF-31. The DF-31 is capable of delivering a single multi-megaton H-bomb or up to three 90-kiloton nuclear bombs. The most recent DF-31 test took place earlier this year, and some Pentagon analysts expect the PLA Second Artillery will begin active deployment of DF-31 units early next year. 1,000 Nuclear Missiles by 2006. Clearly, China apologists must seriously consider the growing capability of Beijing's nuclear missile forces, including the tremendous buildup of short-range tactical missiles. China continues to deploy short-range "Dong Feng" or "East Wind" missiles. China has a force of nearly 500 DF-15 and DF-11 mobile tactical missiles and at the current rate of production will have more than 1,000 missiles by 2006. The Soviet Union and the U.S. considered the short-range tactical missile to be the most dangerous threat to peace because of its short flight time. Despite the tension between Moscow and Washington, both sides agreed to withdraw and ban the weapons. The Soviet SS-20 Saber and U.S. Pershing missiles were dismantled and destroyed. It is worth noting that each Chinese DF-15 tactical missile has a flight time of less than four minutes, from launch to impact. Today, China dominates the tactical nuclear missile category and frequently demonstrates that fact. In 1996, China dropped dummy DF-15 warheads just off Taiwan's coastline.
Contention 3 is 6 Party Talks
Scenario 1 is North Korean war
At a time when North Korea is attempting to show it's ready to resume six-party talks on its nuclear weapons program, Pyongyang fired off a volley of rhetoric aimed at joint US and South Korean military exercises. The denunciation, one day after the US announced new sanctions may increase regional tensions, say analysts, but does not mean fresh clashes are likely. At the regional forum of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in the Vietnamese capital of Hanoi, North Korean spokesman Ri Tong-il characterized US and South Korea war games as “a grave threat to the peace and security not only of the Korean peninsula but of the region.” While Mr. Ri’s tone was typical of North Korean denunciations of the annual US and South Korean exercises staged every spring, analysts fear North Korea may be using the war games to raise the temperature in the wake of the sinking of a South Korean navy ship in the Yellow Sea. The war games are slated to begin Sunday off South Korea's east coast. "[North Korea sees] the exercises as a real danger,” says Kim Bum-soo, a scholar on international relations and editor of an influential conservative magazine. “If we carry out the exercises, North Korea needs to fly its own fighters, to take defensive measure," he advises. But North Korea’s aging warplanes, mostly Russian-built MiGs, are not likely to go anywhere near the exercises. They remain grounded much of the time due to of a lack of fuel and spare parts. “I don’t think there will be retaliation in the near future,” says Mr. Kim, even though “the exercises will increase tensions.” He says he sees pressure against North Korea as building on the basis of “two-plus two talks” – that is, the meetings this week between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates and their South Korean counterparts in Seoul. North Korea appears to see those meetings, and the exercises, as the basis for revving up a diplomatic campaign intended to show its willingness to return to six-party talks on its nuclear weapons. North Korea’s spokesman says the country would return to the talks on North Korea’s nuclear program, last held in Beijing in December 2008, if they were held on “an equal footing” with other participants.
The annual joint military exercise of the United States and South Korea, which the two parties termed as purely defensive, is feared to dampen the efforts to reopen the six-party talks and may also undermine the volatile inter-Korean relations. On Thursday, the U.S.-South Korean military exercise, codenamed "Key Resolve/Foal Eagle," has entered the fourth day of its 11-day run. First launched in 1968, the "routine exercise" by the two militaries has continued to this year without interruption, with only names changed. Also unshaken is the military cooperation between the U.S. and South Korea, which is buttressed by joint exercise and annual ministerial-level Security Consultative Meetings. This year's drill engages about 10,000 U.S. troops and 8,000 reinforcement personnel for the Key Resolve exercise and it also involves some 20,000 South Korean troops in the Foal Eagle one. It includes live firing by U.S. Marines, aerial attack drills and urban warfare training across South Korea. The United States and South Korea argued that the joint exercise is aimed at rehearsing the defense of South Korea in case of emergencies and improving combined operational posture between the two militaries, while the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) denounced it as preparation for a nuclear attack. The joint exercise this year is confronted with more vehement reaction from the DPRK side as its army spokesman declared an end to military dialogue between the DPRK and South Korea and the high command ordered the entire army, navy and air force into a state of alert. In protest against the joint exercise, the DPRK also threatened to halt its denuclearization process, strengthen its nuclear deterrence and be no longer bound by the truce that ended the 1950- 53 Korean War, as the two sides are technically at war with no peace treaty signed. SIX-PARTY TALKS FURTHER STALLED The U.S.-South Korean joint drill came amid a rather sensitive time as various diplomatic efforts are being made to bring the DPRK back to the negotiation table for denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula. However, the positive signs, which the DPRK had shown during a flurry of inter-Korean talks and a recent exchange of high-level visits between Beijing and Pyongyang, seem to have been reduced to nothing. The DPRK said in an earlier statement that it will not rejoin the suspended six-party talks, which it quit last April in protest against UN sanctions, or hold further military dialogue only if the joint military drill is dropped and the UN sanctions are lifted.
Six party talks is the only way to solve the NK nukes – US can’t solve problem alone, UN Security Council does not include all involved countries, and it prevents NK from playing countries against one another
Peter Van Ness, visiting fellow in the Contemporary China Centre and the Department of International Relations at the ANU, coordinator of the project on peace building in Northeast Asia, 06/23/09, “Stick to the Six Party Talks on North Korea” http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/06/23/stick-to-the-six-party-talks-on-north-korea/
The DPRK has now tested a second nuclear device, launched more missiles, and even nullified all of its agreements from previous negotiations, including the truce that ended the Korean War (1950-1953). After the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1874, more provocations followed. Clearly Kim Jong-Il’s first priority is to keep his regime in power, and it is very likely that Pyongyang sees nuclear weapons adventurism as the best way to do that. If so, what can be done to dissuade the DPRK and move to a new course? None of North Korea’s neighbours want to see the regime collapse for fear of thousands of refugees and a fundamental destabilization of the region. But to permit North Korea to emerge as a nuclear-weapons power would probably produce a nuclear arms race in the region with serious implications for non-proliferation elsewhere in the world, including Iran and with respect to non-state actors. Compounding the difficulty in dealing with this situation, there are doubts about whether Kim Jong-Il is in complete control after apparently suffering a stroke last August – it is reported that he has chosen his youngest son, Kim Jong-Un, as his successor. Why is the Six Party Talks still the best venue for working out a joint response to North Korea’s provocation when Pyongyang insists that the Talks are dead and that it would not participate? Resolutions from the United Nations Security Council can be helpful, but its deliberations to date have been characterized more by demonstrating serious differences among the major powers rather than providing a context for reaching agreement about how to proceed. Let me suggest three main reasons for choosing the SPT as the best venue to build a viable policy response to North Korea. 1. The United States cannot resolve this problem by itself. President Obama will need the core countries in the region to put together a successful strategy to deal with North Korea. As Henry Kissinger has argued, ’No long-term solution of the Korean nuclear problem is sustainable without the key players of Northeast Asia, and that means China, South Korea, the United States and Japan, with an important role for Russia as well.’ The SPT includes all of these core countries; the UN Security Council does not. Moreover, the Security Council includes two members with veto power, the UK and France, which are not directly involved in the confrontation, and ten more members elected for a two-year terms — all countries that have their own separate interests to be served when debating about how to deal with the Korean problem. President Obama needs to bring together only the key players to build a consensus about how to deal with the DPRK. 2. A fundamental principle in North Korean strategy, as we have seen time and again in previous negotiations, is to attempt to play countries against one another. To defend against this approach, it is best to address the DPRK in a negotiation in which all of the most affected countries, but no others, directly participate. The objective should be to address Pyongyang with one voice and a shared commitment to sustain the positions being put forward. Whether the decision is to impose additional sanctions or to provide further positive inducements, or some combination of the two, all parties should be firmly supportive of the initiative so that Pyongyang cannot play them against each other. NK has enough plutonium for 6 atomic bombs and will use them if in conflict Japan Today 3-26-10 “North Korea vows 'nuclear strikes' in latest threat”
(http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/n-korea-vows-nuclear-strikes-in-latest-threat) North Korea’s military warned South Korea and the United States on Friday of “unprecedented nuclear strikes” over a report the two countries plan to prepare for possible instability in the totalitarian country. The North routinely issues such warnings and officials in Seoul and Washington react calmly. Diplomats in South Korea and the U.S. instead have repeatedly called on Pyongyang to return to international negotiations aimed at ending its nuclear programs. “Those who seek to bring down the system in the (North), whether they play a main role or a passive role, will fall victim to the unprecedented nuclear strikes of the invincible army,” North Korea’s military said in comments carried by the official Korean Central News Agency. The North, believed have enough weaponized plutonium for at least half a dozen atomic bombs, conducted its second atomic test last year, drawing tighter U.N. sanctions. Experts from South Korea, the U.S. and China will meet in China next month to share information on North Korea, assess possible contingencies in the country, and consider ways to cooperate in case of an emergency situation, South Korea’s Dong-a Ilbo newspaper reported earlier this month, citing unidentified sources in Seoul and Beijing. The experts will also hold follow-up meetings in Seoul in June and in Honolulu in July, it said. The North Korean statement Friday specifically referred to the March 19 newspaper report. A spokeswoman said the South Korean Defense Ministry had no information. South Korean media have reported that Seoul has drawn up a military operations plan with the United States to cope with possible emergencies in the North. The North says the U.S. plots to topple its regime, a claim Washington has consistently denied. Last month, the North also threatened a “powerful—even nuclear—attack,” if the U.S. and South Korea went ahead with annual military drills. There was no military provocation from North Korea during the exercises. China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the U.S. have been trying to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons in six party talks. The North quit the negotiations last year. The fate of the North’s nuclear weapons has taken on added urgency since late 2008 as concerns over the health of leader Kim Jong Il have intensified. Kim, who suffered an apparent stroke in 2008, may die within three years, South Korean media have reported. His death is thought to have the potential to trigger instability and a power struggle in the North.
A Korean conflict causes global thermonuclear exchange killing all life. Chol Director Center for Korean American Peace’02 (Chol, 2002 10-24, http://nautilus.org/fora/security/0212A_Chol.html) Any military strike initiated against North Korea will promptly explode into a thermonuclear exchange between a tiny nuclear-armed North Korea and the world's superpower, America. The most densely populated Metropolitan U.S.A., Japan and South Korea will certainly evaporate in The Day After scenario-type nightmare. The New York Times warned in its August 27, 2002 comment: "North Korea runs a more advanced biological, chemical and nuclear weapons program, targets American military bases and is developing missiles that could reach the lower 48 states. Yet there's good reason President Bush is not talking about taking out Dear Leader Kim Jong Il. If we tried, the Dear Leader would bombard South Korea and Japan with never gas or even nuclear warheads, and (according to one Pentagon study) kill up to a million people." Continues…The first two options should be sobering nightmare scenarios for a wise Bush and his policy planners. If they should opt for either of the scenarios, that would be their decision, which the North Koreans are in no position to take issue with. The Americans would realize too late that the North Korean mean what they say. The North Koreans will use all their resources in their arsenal to fight a full-scale nuclear exchange with the Americans in the last war of mankind. A nuclear-armed North Korea would be most destabilizing in the region and the rest of the world in the eyes of the Americans. They would end up finding themselves reduced to a second-class nuclear power.
Scenario 2 is Kaesong Industrial Complex
6 Party talks will focus on Korean peace and security – successful talks will lead to development of the Kaesong Industrial Complex Chon Hyun Joon, Senior Researcher, Korea Institute of National Unification and Institute for Far Eastern Studies 01/25/10 “THE NORTH KOREAN NUCLEAR ISSUE AND ‘SIX-PARTY TALKS’” - IFES Therefore, it appears that the North will double its efforts in the future to conclude a U.S.-DPRK peace agreement in order to resolve the nuclear issue and, of course, to ensure regime stability. On January 11, a North Korean Foreign Ministry statement proposed a meeting of parties involved in the armistice to discuss a peace agreement. This is evidence that the North’s diplomatic offensive has begun. We need to take advantage of the North’s positive stance. Now a six-party summit meeting needs to be convened in order to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue, as it is of decidedly growing importance to regional and even global security. If a six-way summit meeting is to be realized, then the six countries need to set aside their self-interests, and not inject their own problems into Six-Party Talks. The focus of the talks needs to be only on Korean peninsular peace and security through resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. Of course, bringing together all six countries will not be easy. However, if China, Russia, South Korea, Japan and the United States can recognize the seriousness of North Korea’s nuclear issue, then Six-Party Talks could be revived in 2010 and North Korean denuclearization could begin, with political relations between North Korea and the United States improving and economic aid for Pyongyang could begin to flow. Discussion will begin on issues such as security guarantees for the North and building a peace regime on the Korean peninsula. Obviously, an inter-Korean summit will be held, production in the Kaesong Industrial Complex will grow, and tourism to Mount Kumgang will be revived. North Korea will also further open up and the DMZ will be put to peaceful uses. Pyongyang’s nuclear program is an issue for both global and peninsular peace. This is also the reason the South Korean government needs to more actively work to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue.
The Kaesong complex is extremely critical to South Korean economy Park Suhk-sam – senior economist at the Bank of Korea, EAST ASIAN REVIEW Vol. 16, No. 3, Autumn 2004, pp. 87-104 “Creating a Visible Bridge: The Economic Impact of Kaesong Industrial Complex Construction”
The Kaesong Industrial Complex will help South Korean smalland medium-sized companies cut costs drastically, boosting ordinary profits by 200 to 700 percent, depending on the type of industry. The benefits will ultimately raise price competitiveness of South Korean industries, and help the South Korean economy make a soft landing in industrial restructuring. If the companies operating in the Kaesong industrial complex make use of these benefits to reduce costs of the products, it will increase their price competitiveness and increase their market share in the domestic and international markets. The Kaesong Industrial Complex will also help labor-intensive industries to regain their price competitiveness. Moreover, marginal firms on the brink of bankruptcy due to falling profitability are expected to move into the complex rather than into China, in order to capitalize on low labor costs. The Kaesong Industrial Complex will also promote both Koreas’ economic growth. The sizes of the South and North Korean economies will not be affected much by the Kaesong Industrial Complex until the 8th year when the first and the second stages are in operation, but in the 9th year when the third stage begins, substantial impacts are expected, which will stabilize in the 17th year. Meanwhile, to ensure that the expected economic benefits materialize, the assumption is that 190,000 South Korean companies18) will move into the Kaesong Industrial Complex for 8 years when the first, second and third-stage projects are finished. Therefore, the impact of the Kaesong Industrial Complex on the South Korean economy depends on South Korea’s potential to bring enough business into the complex. If existing companies in South Korea shut down their factories and move into Kaesong, it will decrease added value and employment in the South Korean economy, reducing the overall economic effects of the Kaesong Industrial Complex on the South Korean economy explained above. However, in the event that South Korean marginal companies and those which originally planned to advance into China move into the Kaesong Industrial Complex, it will have a positive effect, rather than a negative impact on the South Korean economy. Moreover, considering that a sizable number of new businesses targeting the high-profit potential of Kaesong will be included in the total movement statistics, the exodus of South Korean companies into the Kaesong Industrial Complex over the next eight years will not create much negative impact on the South Korean economy. In the long-term, the Kaesong Industrial Complex will definitely contribute to the unification of South and North Korea, and its proximity to the demarcation line will reinforce the idea that it is a symbol of peace. The complex will also entail massive movement of goods and human exchange, as well as contacts between South and North Koreans related to the operation of factories in Kaesong, substantially easing tensions on the Korean Peninsula. In the Kaesong Industrial Complex, South Korea will be able to access cheap land and labor of North Korea while North Korea will earn hard currency from South Korea. When inter-Korean relations are established on the basis of mutual economic benefits, the relations will be less affected by factors other than economic ones. In addition, the Kaesong Industrial Complex will house South Korean companies and South Korean developers will manage them according to the market economy, giving North Korea the opportunity to learn about the system
South Korea Economy Impact
Need to find one
Contention 4 is Solvency
Ending Military Exercises will not undermine US-South Korea military interoperability - Cobra Gold is the biggest multinational military exercise in the world – it solves US-Asia interoperability American Forces Press Service, accessed through Global Security “Six Nations Gear Up for Cobra Gold 2010”, 01/12/10, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2010/01/mil-100112-afps04.htm
FORT SHAFTER, Hawaii– Cobra Gold, the largest multinational military exercise in the world, begins its 29th year of joint training and cooperation among six countries in the Asia-Pacific theater in Thailand on Feb.1. Cobra Gold 2010 marks the first time South Korea will participate in the exercise. “Thailand is one of our closest friends and partners in Asia, as well as being our oldest ally in Asia,” said Lt. Gen. Benjamin R. Mixon, commander, U.S. Army Pacific. “The Cobra Gold __exercise__ is the largest multilateral joint military exercise in the world.” Sponsored by U.S. Pacific Command and the Royal Thai Supreme Command, the three-week exercise includes a command-post exercise, a series of medical and engineering civic-action projects and joint and combined field training. The exercise continues to serve as a venue to build interoperability between the United States and its Asia-Pacific regional partners. The command-post exercise focuses on training a Thai, U.S., Singaporean, Indonesian, and South Korean coalition task force. The exercise also includes Japan participating within a United Nations Force staff. A team composed of representatives from Brunei, Chile, China, Germany, Laos, Mongolia, New Zealand, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Vietnam will observe the command-post exercise at the invitation of the Thai government. Among Cobra Gold 2010’s objectives is Pacom’s rapid deployment of a joint task force and subsequent coordination with U.N. forces, with the aim of improving Pacom’s ability to conduct multinational operations and increase interoperability with partner nations, officials said. In addition, officials noted, the military-to-military relationships developed during Cobra Gold exercises underscore a combined capability to face myriad issues in the Asia-Pacific theater, including terrorism, transnational threats, and humanitarian-assistance and disaster-relief efforts.
China reiterated its call Tuesday to resume stalled multinational talks aimed at denuclearizing North Korea. It was the second call from the Chinese foreign ministry following last Friday's adoption of a U.N. Security Council (UNSC) statement on the deadly sinking of a South Korean warship in March. The 15-member Council, including China, unanimously approved the statement a month after South Korea referred the North Korean attack on the South's naval ship to the global security body. A North Korean torpedo sunk the Cheonan ship in the Yellow Sea, killing 46 South Korean sailors. "We hope the parties concerned enhance trust, reduce differences and improve relations through dialogue and contact while contributing to peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula," Qin Gang, spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry, said at a semiweekly press briefing. The remark came after South Korea urged the North to apologize for the attack in recognition of the spirit of the statement before resuming the six-party talks. The United States also called on North Korea to renounce further provocations and hold to its denuclearization pledge with an eye toward resuming the six-party talks. The spokesman also reconfirmed that China is still against the proposed South Korea-U.S. joint naval exercises in the Yellow Sea. "We call upon the relevant parties not to escalate the (already) tense situation," Qin said. "By enhancing dialogue and negotiations, we should together maintain regional security, rather than undermine it. Then we will be able to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and bring peace and stability to the region." South Korea and the U.S. plan to stage massive anti-submarine exercises later this month in waters between the Korean Peninsula and China in a show of force against North Korea. Beijing has strongly opposed the planned drills that will reportedly include a U.S. nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, saying they are "provocative actions toward China."
Contention 1 is Inherency
Joint Military Exercises cause North Korea to threaten nuclear retaliation
Hyung-Jin Kim, Associated Press Writer, 7-20-10, “US, SKorea to conduct military drills next week” (http://www.bnd.com/2010/07/20/1335397/us-skorea-to-conduct-military.html)
SEOUL, South Korea -- The U.S. and South Korea will launch joint military exercises this weekend to sharpen their readiness against North Korean aggression, the allies' defense chiefs, despite warnings from Pyongyang that the drills would deepen tensions on the peninsula. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Washington and Seoul want to send a "clear message" to North Korea after the March sinking of a South Korean warship. Forty-six South Korean sailors were killed in the sinking, which an international investigation pinned on a torpedo fired from a North Korean submarine near the Koreas' tense sea border. The waters have been the site of several bloody skirmishes in recent years.
South Korean honor guard soldiers wearing traditional military uniforms, salute during a rehearsal for the welcoming ceremony of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates in Seoul, South Korea, Tuesday, July 20, 2010. Gates, who arrived on Monday, will be joined by Clinton on Wednesday for high-profile security talks with their South Korean colleagues, a meeting meant to underscore Washington's firm alliance with Seoul as the two nations plan military exercises in a message of deterrence to North Korea. "These defensive, combined exercises are designed to send a clear message to North Korea that its aggressive behavior must stop, and that we are committed to together enhancing our combined defensive capabilities," Gates and South Korea's Kim Tae-young said in a joint statement issued Tuesday after their talks. North Korea flatly denies the accusations, and has warned that any punishment would trigger war. Gates arrived in South Korea late Monday for a series of high-profile security talks with South Korean officials. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton landed in Seoul on Wednesday morning for a conference with Gates and their South Korean counterparts later in the day. The U.S. and South Korea say North Korea must pay for the sinking of the Cheonan, the worst military attack on South Korea since the 1950-53 Korean War. The two Koreas remain in a state of war because the conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. South Korea's foreign minister, Yu Myung-hwan, told the YTN television network in an interview Tuesday that Washington is considering additional sanctions against North Korea. He said he expected a U.S. announcement on the issue on Wednesday. Clinton on Tuesday described South Korea as a "stalwart ally" but did not mention possible new sanctions. "It's particularly timely to show our strong support for South Korea, a stalwart ally, and send a very clear message to North Korea," Clinton told reporters in Kabul where she was attending an international conference on Afghanistan before departing for Seoul. "Tomorrow is a real show of solidarity."Gates said he and Clinton are to visit the Demilitarized Zone dividing the two Koreas on Wednesday to demonstrate their "steadfast commitment" to South Korea, where Washington stations 28,500 troops as deterrence against the North. The 155-mile-long (250-kilometer-long) DMZ serves as a buffer between the two Koreas and is strewn with land mines and guarded by hundreds of thousands of combat-ready troops.
At the height of the Cold War, the two Koreas occasionally exchanged gunfire along the DMZ. In 1976, two U.S. Army officers were hacked to death there with their own axes by North Korean soldiers. Former President Bill Clinton, who toured the no-man's land in 1993, reportedly described it as "the scariest place on Earth."South Korea and the U.S. plan to conduct a four-day combined maritime and air readiness exercise, dubbed "Invincible Spirit," off the Korean peninsula's east coast from July 25-28, their militaries said in a separate joint statement. About 8,000 South Korean and U.S. troops, more than 20 alliance warships and submarines including the massive aircraft carrier USS George Washington and 200 military planes are to take part in next week's drills, it said. The F-22 Raptor - the world's most advanced fighter jets - will also be flying training missions in and around Korea for the first time, it added. More joint drills would follow off Korea's east and west coasts in the coming months, the statement said. South Korea and the U.S. have said the drills are defensive-oriented, but the North has warned the training would only intensify tension because it is nothing but a preparation for an invasion. "The warmongers would be well advised to behave themselves, bearing deep in mind the consequences to be entailed by the above-said war moves," the North's government-run Minju Joson newspaper said in a commentary carried Tuesday by the official Korean Central News Agency. China has also opposed South Korea-U.S. military exercise, particularly one in the Yellow Sea, saying that would inflame tension on the peninsula.
NK threatens a sacred war that will be nuclear in response to joint military exercises
David Eimer, East Asian Corrospondent for the Telegraph, 07/24/10 “North Korea ready for 'sacred war' against South”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/7908078/North-Korea-ready-for-sacred-war-against-South.html
The latest threat from the DPRK came the day before a large joint US-South Korean naval exercise is scheduled to start off the Korean peninsula. It follows Washington’s announcement last Wednesday that it would impose new sanctions on the renegade regime. Pyongyang raised the prospect of using its small nuclear arsenal in any future confrontation in a statement from the National Defence Commission issued by North Korea’s official news agency KCNA. “The army and people of the DPRK will start a retaliatory sacred war of their own style based on nuclear deterrent any time necessary in order to counter the US imperialists and the South Korean puppet forces deliberately pushing the situation to the brink of war,” said the statement. On Friday, North Korea had promised a ‘physical response’ to the naval war games. But by threatening to use nuclear weapons, Pyongyang has further elevated tensions in the region that have been running high since the sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan in March. Seoul claims a DPRK submarine was responsible for the loss of the corvette and the 46 crew on board. Sunday’s naval manoeuvres, which will see the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington join 20 other ships in the Sea of Japan, were planned as an effort to deter further aggression from North Korea. Pyongyang, though, has repeatedly denied sinking the Cheonan and claimed Saturday that the exercises were “nothing more than outright provocations aimed to stifle the DPRK through force of arms.” China, too, has criticised the drills and is unhappy with such a show of US military strength so close to its borders. Washington dismissed Pyongyang’s threat to use nuclear weapons as mere rhetoric. “What we need from North Korea are fewer provocative words and more constructive action,” said US State Department spokesman PJ Crowley.
Thus the plan: The United States Federal Government should stop the joint military exercises operated by the United States and South Korean Military in the Korean peninsula
China Advantage (1/5)
Contention 2 is US – China Relations
Relations with China are rapidly declining – freeze of all military Sino-US talks and naval standoffs prove
Iskander Rehman, Visiting International Fellow at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, 7/7/10, Eurasia Review, "Deflecting The Assassin's Mace: Pentagon's New AirSea Battle Concept", http://www.eurasiareview.com/201007074555/deflecting-the-assassins-mace-pentagons-new-airsea-battle-concept-and-its-strategic-relevance-to-india.html
Over the past year, a whispering chill has settled over the waters of the Asia-Pacific, and as Sino-US relations continue their downward plunge, all talk of an emergent G2 axis based on mutual understanding and cooperation seems increasingly blithe. Already marred by a series of naval stand-offs in 2009, ranging from the harassing of the USNS Impeccable in the South China Sea to a mysterious collision between a Chinese submarine and the USS John McCain’s towed sonar array off the coast of the Philippines, Sino-US took a further blow earlier this year when Beijing unilaterally decided to freeze all militaryto- military contacts in response to the official confirmation of a long-announced 6.4 billion dollar arms transfer to Taiwan. The 9th Asian Security Summit, or Shangri-La Dialogue, held in Singapore last month, was the scene of tense verbal exchanges between US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates and General Zhu Chenghu of the Beijing National Defence University. This came only days after the Defence Secretary’s proposed fence-mending visit to the Chinese capital had been abruptly turned down.1 The Chinese government’s snub, cryptically imputed to the “visit’s inconvenient timing,” was a knee-jerk reaction not only to the Taiwan deal but also to the release of a new and potentially game-changing document named “AirSea Battle: A Point-of-Departure Operation Concept.” This 123 page report, which was released by the increasingly influential Washington DC-based Centre for Budgetary and Strategic Assessments (CBSA) in May, could not be more different in tone from the Obama Administration’s National Security Strategy, which preceded it by only a week or so. Indeed, while the latter expounds at length, and in rather woolly terms, the virtues of engagement, the AirSea Battle (ASB) concept, which has been subsequently validated by both the US Air Force and the Navy, is a terse, concise call for greater jointness between the two services in the WPTO, or “Western Pacific Theatre of Operations”, and is probably the most detailed blueprint for an armed Sino-US confrontation to have been released in the public domain for years. While its authors take pains to stress that the report is in no way a manifesto in favour of containment of China, or of a roll-back of the PLA’s military power, they do state quite clearly that the goal of ASB is to “offset the PLA’s unprovoked and unwarranted military buildup.” 2 This occurs at a time when China’s growing anti-access and area-denial capabilities (A2/AD) have fostered fears that US power projection in the region may become not only increasingly difficult due to its stagnating naval force structure, but also particularly risk-prone, thus leading to a slow but inexorable decline of American influence in the Asia-Pacific Theatre. This has led to widespread concern, not only amongst the cognoscenti of the US policy-making world, but also in Asia, where fears of an impending security vacuum have sparked a naval arms race. What follows is an attempt to shed some light on Asia’s rapidly morphing security arena, first by briefly outlining the emerging fault lines and potholes currently shaking the regional military balance; and secondly by summarizing some of the main ideas underlying the ASB concept. It will then be argued that, notwithstanding the fact that the Indian Ocean’s tactical environment differs greatly from that of the Western Pacific, India can nonetheless glean some valuable insights from AirSea Battle, most notably when it comes to countervailing Pakistan’s vigorous efforts to implement a strategy of offensive sea denial.
China Advantage (2/5)
China is opposed to US-ROK Joint Military Exercises for 5 reasons – Security, Strategic Thinking, Geopolitical Strategy, Security in the Korean Peninsula, and Sino-US relations – stopping it would be a bargaining chip in US-China relations
People's Daily Online, ”Why China opposes US-South Korean military exercises in the Yellow Sea” 07/16/10,
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90780/91342/7069743.html
Major General Luo Yuan, deputy secretary general with the PLA Academy of Military Sciences, explained the reasons why China is opposed to the U.S.-South Korean military exercises in the Yellow Sea in a recent online discussion with netizens on People's Daily Online. Luo pointed out five reasons behind China's opposition to the joint military exercises: First, in terms of security, Chairman Mao Zedong once said, "We will never allow others to keep snoring beside our beds." If the United States were in China's shoes, would it allow China to stage military exercises near its western and eastern coasts Just like an old Chinese saying goes, "Do not do unto others what you do not want others to do unto you," if the United States does not wish to be treated in a specific way, it should not forcefully sell the way to others. Second, in terms of strategic thinking, China should take into account the worst possibility and strive to seek the best results. The bottom line of strategic thinking is to nip the evil in the bud. The ultimate level of strategic thinking is to subdue the enemy without fighting. Preventing crisis is the best way to resolve and overcome the crisis. China's current tough stance is part of preventive diplomacy. Third, in terms of geopolitical strategy, the Yellow Sea is the gateway to China's capital region and a vital passage to the heartland of Beijing and Tianjin. In history, foreign invaders repeatedly took the Yellow Sea as an entrance to enter the heartland of Beijing and Tianjin. The drill area selected by the United States and South Korea is only 500 kilometers away from Beijing. China will be aware of the security pressure from military exercises conducted by any country in an area that is so close to China's heartland. The aircraft carrier U.S.S. George Washington dispatched to the Yellow Sea has a combat radius of 600 kilometers and its aircraft has a combat radius as long as 1,000 kilometers. Therefore, the military exercise in the area has posed a direct security threat to China's heartland and the Bohai Rim Economic Circle. Fourth, in a bid to safeguard security on the Korean Peninsula, the U. N. Security Council has just issued a presidential statement, requiring all parties to remain calm and restrained to the so-called "Cheonan" naval ship incident, which had caused a major crisis on the Korean Peninsula. On the other hand, the joint military exercise by the United States and South Korea on the Yellow Sea has created a new crisis. This is another reason why China strongly opposes the military exercise on the Yellow Sea. In order to safeguard security on the Korea Peninsula, no country should create a new crisis instead they should control and deal with the existing one. Fifth, in terms of maintaining China-U.S. relations, especially the two parties' military relations, China must declare its solemn stance. China has been working to promote the healthy development of China-U.S. military relations. Therefore, China has clearly declared that it is willing to promote the development of the two parties' relations. Deputy Director of the General Staff Gen. Ma Xiaotian has also expressed his welcome to U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates to visit China at a proper time. Ma had made it clear at the meeting in Singapore that three key problems greatly impeded China-U.S. exchanges. First, the Unites States' arms sales to Taiwan. Second, the frequently detected American military aircraft and ships over and on the East and South China seas at close range. Third, the 2000 U.S. National Defense Authorization Act and the Delay Amendment restricted military exchanges with China in 12 fields. The current barriers have not been eliminated, while the United States has created another obstacle. This time, they not only sent military ships, nuclear submarines and Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers, but also aircraft carriers. Luo added that a U.S. aircraft carrier had once been in the Yellow Sea in 1994, also known as the "Kitty Hawk issue," which caused strong reactions from China at that time. After that, aircraft carriers have never appeared in the Yellow Sea area. The United States and South Korea said that the joint military exercise aims at putting pressure on North Korea and deterring North Korea's submarines. However, as the Yellow Sea is a marine outlet, the joint military exercises actually include the task of military surveillance. Any aircraft carrier has strong reconnaissance and early warning capacities therefore it can also monitor and detect on the circumjacent hydrologic geology, meaning that it can detect Chinese marine outlets over and over again. As the Yellow Sea is a high sea, the aircraft carrier can also detect the hydro-geological conditions of China's submarines' channels out to sea. Therefore, the two purposes of the joint military exercise, strategic reconnaissance and testing initial combat plans, will pose a threat to China. The United States has always talked about the China military as a threat, but this joint military exercise by the United States and South Korea proved that it is not China but the U.S. military that is the threat.
China Advantage (3/5)
Moving the exercises from the west to the east coast of Korea is not enough to solve – not substantial
Rachel O’Brian, staff writer for AFP, 7/22/10, “Strained US-Sino ties loom at Asia security forum”, http://www.google.com/ hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hjo1aP6h4naTjW5cl_-_eS2hXBWg)
US and South Korean plans to hold a series of naval drills from Sunday in response to North Korea's alleged torpedoing of a South Korean warship in March are the latest source of bad blood between Beijing and Washington. The drills off the Korean peninsula -- relocated from the Yellow Sea due to Chinese objections -- are designed as a warning to nuclear-armed North Korea over the sinking of the warship with the loss of 46 lives, Gates said. Pyongyang denies involvement and Beijing has refused to blame its communist ally. "We resolutely oppose foreign military ships and planes coming to the Yellow Sea and other waters near China to engage in activities that affect China's security interests," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said. During a visit to South Korea this week, Gates acknowledged he was "disappointed" at China's rebuff of his scheduled visit in June but said he was willing to move forward. "I remain open to rebuilding and strengthening military-to-military dialogue between the United States and China because I think it can play an important role in preventing miscalculations and misunderstandings," he said. Even so, top US commanders have made it clear they are watching China's military buildup, particularly its naval reach into disputed territories in the resource-rich South China Sea. Speaking to US troops in South Korea on Wednesday, top US officer Admiral Mike Mullen said China's military had made "a fairly significant investment in high-end equipment" including satellites, aircraft, anti-ship missiles and a planned aircraft carrier group. He called the move a "strategic shift, where they are moving from a focus on their ground forces to focus on their navy, and their maritime forces and their air force". US officials worry that China's more assertive stance in the Pacific Ocean and its anti-ship missile arsenal, capable of striking aircraft carriers, could undercut America's long-dominant naval power in the region. Shi Yinhong, an expert on Sino-US military ties at Renmin University in Beijing, said the relocation of the US-South Korea naval drills from the Yellow Sea would not be enough to re-build trust. "That alone will not help Sino-US relations and the resumption of military ties," he said. "The opportunity to fully resume military exchanges has been lost due to the military exercises." Analysts said ASEAN member states would be looking on in horror as their immediate concerns -- such as territorial claims to islands in the South China Sea -- are drowned out by the noise of Sino-US tensions. Beijing lays claim to the entire sea but ASEAN members Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam have claims to the Spratly archipelago, along with Taiwan. Vietnam also claims the more northerly Paracels. The United States meanwhile demands unfettered access to vital sea lanes in the area. "The current chill in Sino-US military relations is quite unwelcome at the ASEAN Regional Forum," Center for Strategic and International Studies analyst Ernie Bower said.
China Advantage (4/5)
Stopping the military exercises would prevent escalation of tensions with China
Wen Wei Po, Hong Kong newspaper, 7/7/10 (re-reported in BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific, "Hong Kong paper accuses US of 'provoking' China with scheduled military drill", lexis)
In response to the joint military exercise that the United States and the ROK militaries would carry out in the Yellow Sea as they announced, Qin Gang, spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said yesterday that under the current situation, all sides should keep their composure and exercise restraint, and should not do anything that may aggravate the regional tension and do harm to the national security interests in this region. In the past days running, senior Chinese military leaders openly expressed strong opposition to the entry of the US aircraft carrier into the Yellow Sea, and emphasized that China has strong will and capability to deal strikes at any invading foreign warships. The United States' action of carrying out a military exercise in an area critically sensitive to China's security under the pretext of the Ch'o'nan [Cheonan] incident will be an extremely serious military provocation to China, not only reflecting the United States' hegemonic arrogance, but also showing that the United States has extended its strategy of containing China to the military domain in an undisguised manner. China resolutely responded by unsheathing the sword and made clear its clear-cut attitude. This was a necessary move for safeguarding regional peace. The United States should understand that Sino-US cooperation will benefit both sides, but Sino-US struggle will do harm to both sides, immediately stop its activities of military provocations, and prevent the escalation of the tense situation. In the past, the US military mainly carried out exercises in the Sea of Japan. This time, while the situation on the Korean Peninsula became tense drastically because of the Ch'o'nan incident, the United States indicated in a high-profile manner that it would carry out a joint military exercise with the ROK in the Yellow Sea, and announced that it would dispatch an aircraft carrier to take part in the drill. This was actually a targeted action of provoking China, as described in a Chinese proverb - "Xiang Zhuang's sword dance was aimed at killing Pei Gong who was then watching aside". The Yellow Sea is the gateway to the North China region where Beijing, China's national capital, is located. If American aircraft carriers can freely move into this sensitive area, that will put China's Liaodong Peninsula and Shandong Peninsula completely within the attack range of the US military force. This move taken by the US military will obviously smack of military deterrence. On one hand, the show of force in the Yellow Sea may give a warning to the DPRK; on the other hand, this is also to flex muscle towards China and conduct strategic reconnaissance against China's coastal military facilities. No matter what is the purpose, the United States' military presence at the door of China will do nothing good to the easing of the situation on the Korean Peninsula, but will just escalate the confrontation atmosphere in that region. China resolutely responded by unsheathing the sword and first carried out live fire shooting training in the East Sea, showing that China would not be indifferent to the United States' threats, and had capability and determination to protect her national security and the regional stability.
Decreased US-Sino ties lead to regional instability, prolif, and nuclear war
Eschan Adhariri, Armed Forces college national security professor, August 1, 1999 (Jane’s Intelligence Review, online)
Looking ahead, a continued deterioration of Sino-US ties does not bode well for the regional stability of the very large and equally important Asia Pacific. Yet this regional stability might be negatively affected for a long time if Washington and Beijing fail to bounce back from this fiasco and assiduously work to improve their strategic relations. In the meantime, the issue of immediate concern for the USA is nuclear non-proliferation. Immediate work has to be done by both sides to minimize damages on this issue. The PRC, armed with the knowledge of America's premier nuclear programs, is likely to be a much more sought after sources for nuclear proliferation than it has ever been in the past by those countries keenly interested in enhancing the sophistication of their extant nuclear programs and by those who have not yet developed indigenous nuclear know-how but desire to purchase it. China, along with Russia, has an established record proliferating nuclear technology. This reality is not likely to change in the foreseeable future, much to the continued consternation of now-nuclear India. The increased nuclear sophistication on the troubled subcontinent carries with it the risk of a potential nuclear holocaust. The Kashmir issue still remains unresolved and very explosive given the continued intransigence of both India and Pakistan to amicably resolve it.
China Advantage (5/5)
War with China goes nuclear
Charles R. Smith Professor of Politics and History, Marymount University Formerly military historian and research analyst for Data Memory Systems, Inc., a historical evaluation and research organization Tuesday, Aug. 14, 2001 “War With China” http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/8/14/174213.shtml
Fiction? Then consider this fact: The United States has no defense against a missile attack. The U.S. has NO missile defense and is only testing a limited system that might stop one or two missiles. Those who minimize the Chinese strategic forces frequently state that China has only 20 missiles. These people are fools playing games with the lives of millions of innocent humans. They fail to mention that each Chinese strategic missile is tipped with a multi-megaton H-bomb that can vaporize a city. In the previous scenario, Chinese forces used only half their current strategic and tactical missiles in a single attack, turning 10 of the top U.S. cities and most of free Asia into charred, radioactive wastelands. China apologists also question whether Beijing is willing to wage war against America. However, the Chinese military makes it very clear it wants nuclear combat with the U.S.A. According to an August 1999 policy document published by the People's Liberation Army Office of the Central Military Command, "unlike Iraq and Yugoslavia, China is not only a big country, but also possesses a nuclear arsenal that has long since been incorporated into state warfare system and play a real role in our national defense." "In comparison with the U.S. nuclear arsenal, our disadvantage is mainly numeric, which in real wars the qualitative gap will be reflected only as different requirement of strategic theory," states the PLA military document. "In terms of deterrence, there is not any difference in practical value. So far we have built up the capability for the second and third nuclear strikes and are fairly confident in fighting a nuclear war. The PCC [communist Party Central Committee] has decided to pass though formal channels this message to the top leaders in the U.S." China also has recently tested a new long-range missile capable of reaching America, the DF-31. The DF-31 is capable of delivering a single multi-megaton H-bomb or up to three 90-kiloton nuclear bombs. The most recent DF-31 test took place earlier this year, and some Pentagon analysts expect the PLA Second Artillery will begin active deployment of DF-31 units early next year. 1,000 Nuclear Missiles by 2006. Clearly, China apologists must seriously consider the growing capability of Beijing's nuclear missile forces, including the tremendous buildup of short-range tactical missiles. China continues to deploy short-range "Dong Feng" or "East Wind" missiles. China has a force of nearly 500 DF-15 and DF-11 mobile tactical missiles and at the current rate of production will have more than 1,000 missiles by 2006. The Soviet Union and the U.S. considered the short-range tactical missile to be the most dangerous threat to peace because of its short flight time. Despite the tension between Moscow and Washington, both sides agreed to withdraw and ban the weapons. The Soviet SS-20 Saber and U.S. Pershing missiles were dismantled and destroyed. It is worth noting that each Chinese DF-15 tactical missile has a flight time of less than four minutes, from launch to impact. Today, China dominates the tactical nuclear missile category and frequently demonstrates that fact. In 1996, China dropped dummy DF-15 warheads just off Taiwan's coastline.
Contention 3 is 6 Party Talks
Scenario 1 is North Korean war
North is ready to resume six-party talks – sees exercises as grave threats – ending the exercises would be a bargaining chip
Donald Kirk, Correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor, 07/22/10 “North Korea denounces war games, but is still game for six-party talks” http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2010/0722/North-Korea-denounces-war-games-but-is-still-game-for-six-party-talks
At a time when North Korea is attempting to show it's ready to resume six-party talks on its nuclear weapons program, Pyongyang fired off a volley of rhetoric aimed at joint US and South Korean military exercises. The denunciation, one day after the US announced new sanctions may increase regional tensions, say analysts, but does not mean fresh clashes are likely. At the regional forum of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in the Vietnamese capital of Hanoi, North Korean spokesman Ri Tong-il characterized US and South Korea war games as “a grave threat to the peace and security not only of the Korean peninsula but of the region.” While Mr. Ri’s tone was typical of North Korean denunciations of the annual US and South Korean exercises staged every spring, analysts fear North Korea may be using the war games to raise the temperature in the wake of the sinking of a South Korean navy ship in the Yellow Sea. The war games are slated to begin Sunday off South Korea's east coast. "[North Korea sees] the exercises as a real danger,” says Kim Bum-soo, a scholar on international relations and editor of an influential conservative magazine. “If we carry out the exercises, North Korea needs to fly its own fighters, to take defensive measure," he advises. But North Korea’s aging warplanes, mostly Russian-built MiGs, are not likely to go anywhere near the exercises. They remain grounded much of the time due to of a lack of fuel and spare parts. “I don’t think there will be retaliation in the near future,” says Mr. Kim, even though “the exercises will increase tensions.” He says he sees pressure against North Korea as building on the basis of “two-plus two talks” – that is, the meetings this week between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates and their South Korean counterparts in Seoul. North Korea appears to see those meetings, and the exercises, as the basis for revving up a diplomatic campaign intended to show its willingness to return to six-party talks on its nuclear weapons. North Korea’s spokesman says the country would return to the talks on North Korea’s nuclear program, last held in Beijing in December 2008, if they were held on “an equal footing” with other participants.
Joint military exercise kills the six-party talks and undermines NK willingness to negotiate
Zhu Lin, staff writer from Xinhua News, 03/11/10 http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/indepth/2010-03/11/c_13207191.htm
The annual joint military exercise of the United States and South Korea, which the two parties termed as purely defensive, is feared to dampen the efforts to reopen the six-party talks and may also undermine the volatile inter-Korean relations. On Thursday, the U.S.-South Korean military exercise, codenamed "Key Resolve/Foal Eagle," has entered the fourth day of its 11-day run. First launched in 1968, the "routine exercise" by the two militaries has continued to this year without interruption, with only names changed. Also unshaken is the military cooperation between the U.S. and South Korea, which is buttressed by joint exercise and annual ministerial-level Security Consultative Meetings. This year's drill engages about 10,000 U.S. troops and 8,000 reinforcement personnel for the Key Resolve exercise and it also involves some 20,000 South Korean troops in the Foal Eagle one. It includes live firing by U.S. Marines, aerial attack drills and urban warfare training across South Korea. The United States and South Korea argued that the joint exercise is aimed at rehearsing the defense of South Korea in case of emergencies and improving combined operational posture between the two militaries, while the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) denounced it as preparation for a nuclear attack. The joint exercise this year is confronted with more vehement reaction from the DPRK side as its army spokesman declared an end to military dialogue between the DPRK and South Korea and the high command ordered the entire army, navy and air force into a state of alert. In protest against the joint exercise, the DPRK also threatened to halt its denuclearization process, strengthen its nuclear deterrence and be no longer bound by the truce that ended the 1950- 53 Korean War, as the two sides are technically at war with no peace treaty signed.
SIX-PARTY TALKS FURTHER STALLED The U.S.-South Korean joint drill came amid a rather sensitive time as various diplomatic efforts are being made to bring the DPRK back to the negotiation table for denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula. However, the positive signs, which the DPRK had shown during a flurry of inter-Korean talks and a recent exchange of high-level visits between Beijing and Pyongyang, seem to have been reduced to nothing. The DPRK said in an earlier statement that it will not rejoin the suspended six-party talks, which it quit last April in protest against UN sanctions, or hold further military dialogue only if the joint military drill is dropped and the UN sanctions are lifted.
Six party talks is the only way to solve the NK nukes – US can’t solve problem alone, UN Security Council does not include all involved countries, and it prevents NK from playing countries against one another
Peter Van Ness, visiting fellow in the Contemporary China Centre and the Department of International Relations at the ANU, coordinator of the project on peace building in Northeast Asia, 06/23/09, “Stick to the Six Party Talks on North Korea” http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/06/23/stick-to-the-six-party-talks-on-north-korea/
The DPRK has now tested a second nuclear device, launched more missiles, and even nullified all of its agreements from previous negotiations, including the truce that ended the Korean War (1950-1953). After the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1874, more provocations followed. Clearly Kim Jong-Il’s first priority is to keep his regime in power, and it is very likely that Pyongyang sees nuclear weapons adventurism as the best way to do that. If so, what can be done to dissuade the DPRK and move to a new course? None of North Korea’s neighbours want to see the regime collapse for fear of thousands of refugees and a fundamental destabilization of the region. But to permit North Korea to emerge as a nuclear-weapons power would probably produce a nuclear arms race in the region with serious implications for non-proliferation elsewhere in the world, including Iran and with respect to non-state actors. Compounding the difficulty in dealing with this situation, there are doubts about whether Kim Jong-Il is in complete control after apparently suffering a stroke last August – it is reported that he has chosen his youngest son, Kim Jong-Un, as his successor. Why is the Six Party Talks still the best venue for working out a joint response to North Korea’s provocation when Pyongyang insists that the Talks are dead and that it would not participate? Resolutions from the United Nations Security Council can be helpful, but its deliberations to date have been characterized more by demonstrating serious differences among the major powers rather than providing a context for reaching agreement about how to proceed. Let me suggest three main reasons for choosing the SPT as the best venue to build a viable policy response to North Korea. 1. The United States cannot resolve this problem by itself. President Obama will need the core countries in the region to put together a successful strategy to deal with North Korea. As Henry Kissinger has argued, ’No long-term solution of the Korean nuclear problem is sustainable without the key players of Northeast Asia, and that means China, South Korea, the United States and Japan, with an important role for Russia as well.’ The SPT includes all of these core countries; the UN Security Council does not. Moreover, the Security Council includes two members with veto power, the UK and France, which are not directly involved in the confrontation, and ten more members elected for a two-year terms — all countries that have their own separate interests to be served when debating about how to deal with the Korean problem. President Obama needs to bring together only the key players to build a consensus about how to deal with the DPRK. 2. A fundamental principle in North Korean strategy, as we have seen time and again in previous negotiations, is to attempt to play countries against one another. To defend against this approach, it is best to address the DPRK in a negotiation in which all of the most affected countries, but no others, directly participate. The objective should be to address Pyongyang with one voice and a shared commitment to sustain the positions being put forward. Whether the decision is to impose additional sanctions or to provide further positive inducements, or some combination of the two, all parties should be firmly supportive of the initiative so that Pyongyang cannot play them against each other.
NK has enough plutonium for 6 atomic bombs and will use them if in conflict
Japan Today 3-26-10 “North Korea vows 'nuclear strikes' in latest threat”
(http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/n-korea-vows-nuclear-strikes-in-latest-threat)
North Korea’s military warned South Korea and the United States on Friday of “unprecedented nuclear strikes” over a report the two countries plan to prepare for possible instability in the totalitarian country. The North routinely issues such warnings and officials in Seoul and Washington react calmly. Diplomats in South Korea and the U.S. instead have repeatedly called on Pyongyang to return to international negotiations aimed at ending its nuclear programs. “Those who seek to bring down the system in the (North), whether they play a main role or a passive role, will fall victim to the unprecedented nuclear strikes of the invincible army,” North Korea’s military said in comments carried by the official Korean Central News Agency. The North, believed have enough weaponized plutonium for at least half a dozen atomic bombs, conducted its second atomic test last year, drawing tighter U.N. sanctions. Experts from South Korea, the U.S. and China will meet in China next month to share information on North Korea, assess possible contingencies in the country, and consider ways to cooperate in case of an emergency situation, South Korea’s Dong-a Ilbo newspaper reported earlier this month, citing unidentified sources in Seoul and Beijing. The experts will also hold follow-up meetings in Seoul in June and in Honolulu in July, it said. The North Korean statement Friday specifically referred to the March 19 newspaper report. A spokeswoman said the South Korean Defense Ministry had no information. South Korean media have reported that Seoul has drawn up a military operations plan with the United States to cope with possible emergencies in the North. The North says the U.S. plots to topple its regime, a claim Washington has consistently denied. Last month, the North also threatened a “powerful—even nuclear—attack,” if the U.S. and South Korea went ahead with annual military drills. There was no military provocation from North Korea during the exercises. China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the U.S. have been trying to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons in six party talks. The North quit the negotiations last year. The fate of the North’s nuclear weapons has taken on added urgency since late 2008 as concerns over the health of leader Kim Jong Il have intensified. Kim, who suffered an apparent stroke in 2008, may die within three years, South Korean media have reported. His death is thought to have the potential to trigger instability and a power struggle in the North.
A Korean conflict causes global thermonuclear exchange killing all life.
Chol Director Center for Korean American Peace’02 (Chol, 2002 10-24, http://nautilus.org/fora/security/0212A_Chol.html)
Any military strike initiated against North Korea will promptly explode into a thermonuclear exchange between a tiny nuclear-armed North Korea and the world's superpower, America. The most densely populated Metropolitan U.S.A., Japan and South Korea will certainly evaporate in The Day After scenario-type nightmare. The New York Times warned in its August 27, 2002 comment: "North Korea runs a more advanced biological, chemical and nuclear weapons program, targets American military bases and is developing missiles that could reach the lower 48 states. Yet there's good reason President Bush is not talking about taking out Dear Leader Kim Jong Il. If we tried, the Dear Leader would bombard South Korea and Japan with never gas or even nuclear warheads, and (according to one Pentagon study) kill up to a million people." Continues…The first two options should be sobering nightmare scenarios for a wise Bush and his policy planners. If they should opt for either of the scenarios, that would be their decision, which the North Koreans are in no position to take issue with. The Americans would realize too late that the North Korean mean what they say. The North Koreans will use all their resources in their arsenal to fight a full-scale nuclear exchange with the Americans in the last war of mankind. A nuclear-armed North Korea would be most destabilizing in the region and the rest of the world in the eyes of the Americans. They would end up finding themselves reduced to a second-class nuclear power.
Scenario 2 is Kaesong Industrial Complex
6 Party talks will focus on Korean peace and security – successful talks will lead to development of the Kaesong Industrial Complex
Chon Hyun Joon, Senior Researcher, Korea Institute of National Unification and Institute for Far Eastern Studies 01/25/10 “THE NORTH KOREAN NUCLEAR ISSUE AND ‘SIX-PARTY TALKS’” - IFES
Therefore, it appears that the North will double its efforts in the future to conclude a U.S.-DPRK peace agreement in order to resolve the nuclear issue and, of course, to ensure regime stability. On January 11, a North Korean Foreign Ministry statement proposed a meeting of parties involved in the armistice to discuss a peace agreement. This is evidence that the North’s diplomatic offensive has begun. We need to take advantage of the North’s positive stance. Now a six-party summit meeting needs to be convened in order to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue, as it is of decidedly growing importance to regional and even global security. If a six-way summit meeting is to be realized, then the six countries need to set aside their self-interests, and not inject their own problems into Six-Party Talks. The focus of the talks needs to be only on Korean peninsular peace and security through resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. Of course, bringing together all six countries will not be easy. However, if China, Russia, South Korea, Japan and the United States can recognize the seriousness of North Korea’s nuclear issue, then Six-Party Talks could be revived in 2010 and North Korean denuclearization could begin, with political relations between North Korea and the United States improving and economic aid for Pyongyang could begin to flow. Discussion will begin on issues such as security guarantees for the North and building a peace regime on the Korean peninsula. Obviously, an inter-Korean summit will be held, production in the Kaesong Industrial Complex will grow, and tourism to Mount Kumgang will be revived. North Korea will also further open up and the DMZ will be put to peaceful uses. Pyongyang’s nuclear program is an issue for both global and peninsular peace. This is also the reason the South Korean government needs to more actively work to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue.
The Kaesong complex is extremely critical to South Korean economy
Park Suhk-sam – senior economist at the Bank of Korea, EAST ASIAN REVIEW Vol. 16, No. 3, Autumn 2004, pp. 87-104 “Creating a Visible Bridge: The Economic Impact of Kaesong Industrial Complex Construction”
The Kaesong Industrial Complex will help South Korean smalland medium-sized companies cut costs drastically, boosting ordinary profits by 200 to 700 percent, depending on the type of industry. The benefits will ultimately raise price competitiveness of South Korean industries, and help the South Korean economy make a soft landing in industrial restructuring. If the companies operating in the Kaesong industrial complex make use of these benefits to reduce costs of the products, it will increase their price competitiveness and increase their market share in the domestic and international markets. The Kaesong Industrial Complex will also help labor-intensive industries to regain their price competitiveness. Moreover, marginal firms on the brink of bankruptcy due to falling profitability are expected to move into the complex rather than into China, in order to capitalize on low labor costs. The Kaesong Industrial Complex will also promote both Koreas’ economic growth. The sizes of the South and North Korean economies will not be affected much by the Kaesong Industrial Complex until the 8th year when the first and the second stages are in operation, but in the 9th year when the third stage begins, substantial impacts are expected, which will stabilize in the 17th year. Meanwhile, to ensure that the expected economic benefits materialize, the assumption is that 190,000 South Korean companies18) will move into the Kaesong Industrial Complex for 8 years when the first, second and third-stage projects are finished. Therefore, the impact of the Kaesong Industrial Complex on the South Korean economy depends on South Korea’s potential to bring enough business into the complex. If existing companies in South Korea shut down their factories and move into Kaesong, it will decrease added value and employment in the South Korean economy, reducing the overall economic effects of the Kaesong Industrial Complex on the South Korean economy explained above. However, in the event that South Korean marginal companies and those which originally planned to advance into China move into the Kaesong Industrial Complex, it will have a positive effect, rather than a negative impact on the South Korean economy. Moreover, considering that a sizable number of new businesses targeting the high-profit potential of Kaesong will be included in the total movement statistics, the exodus of South Korean companies into the Kaesong Industrial Complex over the next eight years will not create much negative impact on the South Korean economy. In the long-term, the Kaesong Industrial Complex will definitely contribute to the unification of South and North Korea, and its proximity to the demarcation line will reinforce the idea that it is a symbol of peace. The complex will also entail massive movement of goods and human exchange, as well as contacts between South and North Koreans related to the operation of factories in Kaesong, substantially easing tensions on the Korean Peninsula. In the Kaesong Industrial Complex, South Korea will be able to access cheap land and labor of North Korea while North Korea will earn hard currency from South Korea. When inter-Korean relations are established on the basis of mutual economic benefits, the relations will be less affected by factors other than economic ones. In addition, the Kaesong Industrial Complex will house South Korean companies and South Korean developers will manage them according to the market economy, giving North Korea the opportunity to learn about the system
South Korea Economy Impact
Need to find one
Contention 4 is Solvency
Ending Military Exercises will not undermine US-South Korea military interoperability - Cobra Gold is the biggest multinational military exercise in the world – it solves US-Asia interoperability
American Forces Press Service, accessed through Global Security “Six Nations Gear Up for Cobra Gold 2010”, 01/12/10,
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2010/01/mil-100112-afps04.htm
FORT SHAFTER, Hawaii– Cobra Gold, the largest multinational military exercise in the world, begins its 29th year of joint training and cooperation among six countries in the Asia-Pacific theater in Thailand on Feb.1. Cobra Gold 2010 marks the first time South Korea will participate in the exercise. “Thailand is one of our closest friends and partners in Asia, as well as being our oldest ally in Asia,” said Lt. Gen. Benjamin R. Mixon, commander, U.S. Army Pacific. “The Cobra Gold __exercise__ is the largest multilateral joint military exercise in the world.” Sponsored by U.S. Pacific Command and the Royal Thai Supreme Command, the three-week exercise includes a command-post exercise, a series of medical and engineering civic-action projects and joint and combined field training. The exercise continues to serve as a venue to build interoperability between the United States and its Asia-Pacific regional partners. The command-post exercise focuses on training a Thai, U.S., Singaporean, Indonesian, and South Korean coalition task force. The exercise also includes Japan participating within a United Nations Force staff. A team composed of representatives from Brunei, Chile, China, Germany, Laos, Mongolia, New Zealand, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Vietnam will observe the command-post exercise at the invitation of the Thai government. Among Cobra Gold 2010’s objectives is Pacom’s rapid deployment of a joint task force and subsequent coordination with U.N. forces, with the aim of improving Pacom’s ability to conduct multinational operations and increase interoperability with partner nations, officials said. In addition, officials noted, the military-to-military relationships developed during Cobra Gold exercises underscore a combined capability to face myriad issues in the Asia-Pacific theater, including terrorism, transnational threats, and humanitarian-assistance and disaster-relief efforts.
Stopping the joint exercises are key to maintaining regional security and denuclearizing North Korea - China is against them
Kim Young-gyo, staff writer for Yonhap press – 07/13/10 “China reiterates call to resume six-party talks”
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2010/07/13/22/0301000000AEN20100713009400320F.HTML
China reiterated its call Tuesday to resume stalled multinational talks aimed at denuclearizing North Korea. It was the second call from the Chinese foreign ministry following last Friday's adoption of a U.N. Security Council (UNSC) statement on the deadly sinking of a South Korean warship in March. The 15-member Council, including China, unanimously approved the statement a month after South Korea referred the North Korean attack on the South's naval ship to the global security body. A North Korean torpedo sunk the Cheonan ship in the Yellow Sea, killing 46 South Korean sailors. "We hope the parties concerned enhance trust, reduce differences and improve relations through dialogue and contact while contributing to peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula," Qin Gang, spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry, said at a semiweekly press briefing. The remark came after South Korea urged the North to apologize for the attack in recognition of the spirit of the statement before resuming the six-party talks. The United States also called on North Korea to renounce further provocations and hold to its denuclearization pledge with an eye toward resuming the six-party talks. The spokesman also reconfirmed that China is still against the proposed South Korea-U.S. joint naval exercises in the Yellow Sea. "We call upon the relevant parties not to escalate the (already) tense situation," Qin said. "By enhancing dialogue and negotiations, we should together maintain regional security, rather than undermine it. Then we will be able to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and bring peace and stability to the region." South Korea and the U.S. plan to stage massive anti-submarine exercises later this month in waters between the Korean Peninsula and China in a show of force against North Korea. Beijing has strongly opposed the planned drills that will reportedly include a U.S. nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, saying they are "provocative actions toward China."